Recently, the Supreme Court rejected curative petitions seeking a review of its 2019 judgment on adjusted gross revenue (AGR) payable by telecom firms, saying that no case is made out within the parameters laid down by the apex court itself to entertain a curative petition.
About curative petition
- A curative petition is the third stage of proceedings before the Supreme Court, that is filed after proceedings in a special leave petition/appeal and the review of the decision in SLP/appeal.
- Such petitions are accepted only in rare and extraordinary circumstances and not otherwise.
- The curative petition was crafted by the Supreme Court in 2002 in the landmark judgment of Rupa Ashok Hurra vs Ashok Hurra.
- Such a petition is a judicial invention to rectify gross miscarriage of justice in its own final judgments.
- According to the Ashok Hurra case, the court can hear a curative petition only if there is a violation of principles of natural justice, a question of bias against the presiding judge, and/or an abuse of the process of the court.
- The court should consider such petitions only in rare circumstances to prevent frivolous litigation.
- Order 48 of the Supreme Court Rules, enacted in 2013, codifies the requirements of a curative petition and includes a certificate by a Senior Advocate confirming that the requirements for filing a curative petition have been met.
- The Supreme Court’s decision to reopen the Bhopal gas tragedy case through a curative petition led to significant legal developments concerning industrial liability and compensation.
- Another critical case was the acceptance of a curative petition by the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC), which significantly influenced public infrastructure contracts and dispute resolution mechanisms in India.
